The futility of Surface and Windows RT: If only Microsoft had stuck with Intel

Share This article

Over the past week, I’ve had the fortune to play with both Microsoft’s Surface 2 and the Asus T100 Transformer Book. These are very similar devices — convertible laptops with detachable keyboards — except for one big and fundamentally life-altering difference: Where the Surface 2 is powered by Nvidia’s ARM-based Tegra 4 SoC, the Transformer Book has Intel’s x86 Bay Trail under the hood. As a result, while the Surface 2 runs Windows RT, the T100 runs full Windows 8.1. Yes, every program and game that you use on your Windows desktop PC also works on the T100. Steam works on the T100. Team Fortress 2 works on the T100. Photoshop works (surprisingly well!) on the T100. Let that sink in for a moment, and then read on.

If it wasn’t enough to have a tablet-cum-laptop that can run the entire library of x86 games and programs, get this: The T100 gets the same or better battery life than the Surface 2, performance is about equal (better CPU performance; worse GPU), and you get the same amount of storage and micro SD card expansion. The kicker, though, is that the 32GB Asus T100 with keyboard dock is just $350 — the comparable Surface 2 with Type Cover is $580. Oh, I forgot to mention, the T100 comes with Office 2013 Home, too, and unlimited Asus cloud storage.

In short, the only real thing going for the Surface 2 is its 1920×1080 display. The T100’s 1366×768 display is still just fine for 10-inch tablet, but it’s definitely not as sharp as Microsoft’s unit. Still, when you’re talking about a $230 price difference, Asus had to cut some corners — and to be honest, while the T100 definitely feels cheaper than the Surface 2, it doesn’t actually feel cheap or tacky by any means.

Of course, this raises a rather important question: Why would you ever buy the Surface 2, or indeed any other ARM-powered Windows RT tablet? If Intel has finally closed the performance and battery life gap between x86 and ARM, why would you ever intentionally opt for a crippled ARM-powered tablet?

Another interesting comparison to make is the Surface Pro 2, with its fourth-gen (Haswell) Core i5 x86 CPU. Don’t get me wrong, the Core i5-4200U in the Surface Pro 2 is obviously faster than the Atom Z3740 in the Asus T100 — but is it fast enough to make up for the $680 price difference? In most workloads, the Haswell chip is between two and three times faster than Bay Trail. In some heavily threaded integer workloads, the quad-core Bay Trail Z3740 is very nearly as fast as the dual-core Haswell i5-4200U. There are other differences, of course — Haswell’s GPU is much faster than Bay Trail, and the Pro 2 has better expansion ports — but at the same time, the Pro 2 is much heavier than the T100 and really quite hard to use with one hand.

In real-world use, the main difference is that the Surface Pro 2 is capable of playing some modern’ish games at low resolution, while the T100 is mostly limited to 2D and indie games. Intensive apps like Photoshop will be faster on Haswell than Bay Trail, but unless you’re manipulating huge images it probably won’t matter; likewise, unless you’re juggling a bunch of Office docs, Bay Trail will be fast enough. Again, the price gap between the two systems is almost 700 dollars.

Bay Trail über alles

Over the last couple of years I have spent thousands of words trying to get my head around one of technology’s weirder quandaries: Why did Microsoft develop the ARM port of Windows 8 (now called Windows RT) in the first place? Less succinctly, why did Microsoft spend hundreds of millions of dollars, and millions of development hours, building and marketing a platform that has almost no redeeming features?

An Avoton (Silvermont) wafer

The thing is, it’s not like Microsoft didn’t know about Bay Trail. Bay Trail, or at least the out-of-order Silvermont CPU core, has been on Intel’s public roadmap for at least two years. Microsoft, being one of Intel’s closest partners, probably knew about it long before that. Even so, Microsoft made the active decision to forsake the Wintel alliance that had been the cornerstone of its dominance for 20 years, instead penning deals with ARM chipmakers Nvidia and Qualcomm for the future of Windows on smartphones and tablets.

You could argue that Microsoft went with ARM for its lower price point over x86, but considering the Surface RT and other first-gen Windows RT devices couldn’t even beat the price of the iPad, it’s a moot point. Plus, what good is a low price point if Windows RT devices can’t actually do anything?

Tagged In

Post a Comment

I’ve wonder the same thing. Tech circles have takes about bay trail since before RT was released. I’m surprised more tablets, even Android, aren’t going x86/bay trail…

http://www.mrseb.co.uk/ Sebastian Anthony

There should be a lot of Android and Windows Bay Trail tablets this winter. Android tablets are another interesting area, though — except for the Fire and Nexus, there aren’t really any big success stories there.

This is one of the problems that Intel faces — having a competitive mobile chip is nice, but it’s nothing without some huge product wins. Merrifield (the smartphone equivalent of Bay Trail) will be strong, but probably not strong enough to unseat Qualcomm. Intel needs someone like Amazon, Samsung, or Google to go with Bay Trail in their next tablet — but again, I think that’s unlikely.

Matt Menezes

Agreed. I would think Android is in the best position (Windows aside) to take advantage of Bay Trail. They release x86 and ARM versions. I only wonder: how optimized are their x86 releases are compared to the ARM ones, or is the difference trivial?

It seems like Intel might regret not focusing on mobile sooner. Although the ultimate regret must come from AMD selling their handset division to Qualcomm for like $65 million (Qualcomm makes in profit what AMD does in revenue).

As an aside, I don’t understand why, with RAM so cheap, the T100 only comes with 2GB. It seems like 4GB would really let the tablet shine in multitasking (and with that keyboard you bet a lot of users will want to multitask)…

Michael Clapp

I just noticed the new Dell Android tablets are all x86. The problem is that they’re otherwise mediocre in things like screen res. I can’t find any compelling reason to buy the new Dell’s over a Nexus 7.

Samsung has their 10″ tablet with Intel but the reviews were so universally bad that I didn’t buy one as a product development example. The execution for both Dell and Samsung almost feel like Intel financed it and both companies then proceeded to do a half-assed job.

Erik Alapää

x86 is an arcane, bloated, convoluted architecture. The only reason it still lives is intel’s marketing might, money, fab technology and skilled engineers. It is time for the world to move on to RISC processors on everything, not only embedded and mobile devices.

wat

Well I agree with this post to an extent, I was actually saying the exact same thing recently myself but now as I thought about it more; consider this. Within 2 years Samsung is going to be offering an 8 core 2GHz 4 bit 14nm chip with 4 GB RAM for the fraction of a similarly powered Intel CPU and far more powerful than Intel are willing to offer at the same price. ARM could still outpass Intel by leaps and bounds at the same power package.

dfdhf

4 bit logic is going to be very limited. Don’t think I want that, an arduino has double that.

Saby

I’m sure he meant 64bit.
with 14nm finfet you can crank up the frequency even more. upto 3 – 3.5GHz. And yes, such chips will be coming out of TSMC and GloFo as well…
and these $30-40 chips will equal the current Haswell performance – Intel will be ahead by that time, but they are improving at only 10% a year, ARM is doubling…

can you extrapolate?
MS doesn’t seem that stupid, does it, in that environment?

wat

Indeed I meant 64 bit. Intel may be a little better but when you’re talking $400 for an i7 it’s not enough for the price etc.

dfdhf

I wonder what would happen if Intel tried their arm at an ARM chip. Would be interesting to say the least.

Joe_HTH

Sorry, but Samsung’s chips are garbage. Their Exynos chips stink on the benchmarks.

Joe_HTH

Sorry, but Samsung’s chips are garbage. Their Exynos chips stink on the benchmarks.

Ray C

What a completely pointless review. There is a reason there is a Surface and a Surface Pro. The point of the Surface is not to do the same thing you might have done with a laptop. The point of the Surface 2 is to for people to decide if it fit’s their need. It’s point is to be a tablet with a little more functionality than the average tablet. It’s a freaking tablet for goodness sake. Most people that review it or comment on it, don’t review from that perspective. If the title of the article was “Is the Surface 2 worth the price” I could understand because it’s a valid question on whether an RT device should cost more than a full Windows 8.1 device, but everything else is pure BS.

http://www.mrseb.co.uk/ Sebastian Anthony

Okay… now go read the story properly, note that it’s really not a review of the Surface 2 or Surface Pro 2, and then come back and leave another comment.

Both the Surface 2 and Surface Pro 2 are OK tablets, if you look at them on their own. If you introduce them to the rest of the tablet ecosystem, they fall a bit flat, for a big variety of reasons (which are touched on in this story — software ecosystem, pricing, battery life, etc.)

Ray C

I know it’s not a review of the Surface. I’m speaking on all reviews or articles about the Surface. They all basically say ” what is the point of a Microsoft device without x86″ If that’s your argument, what is the point of ANY device without x86 support. The problem is not RT. The problem is Microsoft doesn’t have as many apps as iOS, and it’s hard to come into any market already dominated by not 1 but 2 competitors. Microsoft’s main problem is they constantly seem to underestimate how difficult that is. They can’t use how quickly they turned X-Box into success as a comparison. They have to realize that you have to get your foot in the door. Google realized it. That’s why they were practically give their stuff away for free at first. Microsoft used to realize it a long time ago. In the beginning, they didn’t try to break your pocket.

Ray C

And I’m sure the Surface Pro would fly off the self if it was the same price as Surface, but so would MacBooks is they were half the price they are, but Apple’s not going to do that. The question is are the two Surface devices worth their price. The answer is yes. The problem for Microsoft is that how much something is worth and how much people are willing to pay for it two very different things.

meddle0ne

Everything is worth, what the purchaser is willing to pay. In the case of the Surface 2 the answer is they’re not willing to pay the price. at least yet.

jambone

.. and how much are you paying to read this? OK, so Ray C says ‘pointless’ but that could just as well have been ‘worthless’ .. so did you just prove his point, since this was a free read?

cynic759623479

“How much people are willing to pay for it” is the definition of how much it is worth.

Jdawg Laurence

Surface pro 2 is actually probably the best tablet out there. You can run any app on the higher priced versions, including high end games. The only problem with it, is the extremely steep price. Price does make a product itself good or bad though, but it does turn people off of buying it.

The problem I could see with the Asus tablet mentioned, is the very limited storage. You do get the cloud storage which is nice, but then you have to access that constantly with only 32GB internal.

http://www.mrseb.co.uk/ Sebastian Anthony

There is a 64GB version of the T100. And it has micro SD card expansion!

Matt Menezes

If the T100 had 4GB of RAM, I’d buy it in an instance. Paging to an SSD isn’t too bad, but man I wish it had 4 gigs of RAM…

Here’s to hoping the next model goes with 4GB at the same – or better – price point.

Joe_HTH

Yeah, and it’s build quality and performance suck.

justsaying

for the price?

Jdawg Laurence

Yes, that’s true!

And by “price does make a product…” I meant price doesn’t.

William T Quick

If your definition of “best” is a two-pound “tablet.” In which case I hope you have to one-hand it sometime for a couple of hours or so.

Jdawg Laurence

My definition of best would be the one that can do the most activities, or the most versatile. Most tablets can’t replace a laptop in almost every way, the Surface pro 2 can, as long as you get the extremely overpriced versions.

William T Quick

Look. The whole point of these so-called “hybrids” is to be good at both form factors. Surface Pro is just too damned heavy to be a good, or even decent, tablet. And so, if you aren’t interested in how it functions as a tablet, why not just go ahead and get a laptop, something like that little Sony Vaio Pro 11, which can be even more powerful than the Surface Pro, and lighter to boot?

Jdawg Laurence

My definition of best would be the one that can do the most activities, or the most versatile. Most tablets can’t replace a laptop in almost every way, the Surface pro 2 can, as long as you get the extremely overpriced versions.

roid

That’s misleading. Of course you’re reviewing Surface 2. You said it was pointless to go with ARM when there is Intel, ignoring the fact that Surface 2 Pro didn’t ignore Intel. The desktop is still going away. Surface 2 is the second generation of a product that can only gain more relevance in the futures especially as a tablet. The desktop applications don’t work well as a touch first product. The issue of apps, ecosystem, matters, but that’s only because iOS and Android had a 3+ years headstart.

http://www.mrseb.co.uk/ Sebastian Anthony

Okay… now go read the story properly, note that it’s really not a review of the Surface 2 or Surface Pro 2, and then come back and leave another comment.

Both the Surface 2 and Surface Pro 2 are OK tablets, if you look at them on their own. If you introduce them to the rest of the tablet ecosystem, they fall a bit flat, for a big variety of reasons (which are touched on in this story — software ecosystem, pricing, battery life, etc.)

Ray C

Of course I also get the argument of “why develop RT” assuming the argument is being made that they could have expanded the features of Windows Phone for a tablet. That’s a valid argument, but it’s all moot, since they will be merging. It’s easy to say now that sticking with Intel would have been only “marginally more expensive.” But at the end of the day, I wasn’t aware of a law that said Microsoft is only allowed to make x86 products. That’s all they made before Windows 8, and it didn’t help them any in the world of tablet. His argument is contradicted. He said RT should have come out earlier. So, now he is basically saying “since you didn’t come out with a non-x86 device earlier, just don’t even bother now?” The main issue with Surface is Apple is just about the only company able to move products at a big number when they carry a heavy price tag and that people can’t seem to stop talking about the “lack of apps” in a general sense. No one actually takes the time to say “check out what apps you need, and see if you’re actually using apps that are missing from Windows.”

meddle0ne

The problem with that model is that it’s priced like a laptop.

Joe_HTH

It’s $150 cheaper than an iPad Air, and has more features and can do far more than the iPad can.

Reeses

But you forget that the iPad Air is severely overpriced in itself. It’s not a good comparison because Microsoft is not Apple where they can release anything in the world and people will flock to their stores.

Joe_HTH

It’s $150 cheaper than an iPad Air, and has more features and can do far more than the iPad can.

http://www.jphotog.com Hrunga Zmuda

No, look at the Surface 2 ads. It’s positioning it as the solution that meets all needs. No need for a laptop as well, no need for that iPad that doesn’t do anything (a canard if there ever was one). No, all you need is the do-it-all Surface 2.

Not that it’s true. It’s not. That never stopped Microsoft from yammering on about how their crap is gold and only victims of Cupertino’s RDF could choose anything else.

Their echo chamber is hermetically sealed away from the real world.

mike w

If MS dropped the price on the Surface 2 by $200 would it become the go to device for those that want a Chromebook type device? WinRt is simple, doesn’t have virus problems and have way more apps than Chrome OS.

Joe_HTH

ROTFLMAO! Microsoft might as well slit their own wrists. You’re asking Microsoft to sell a high-end, 10″ tablet with extraordinary build quality for $250? You’re out of your damn mind.

Joe_HTH

ROTFLMAO! Microsoft might as well slit their own wrists. You’re asking Microsoft to sell a high-end, 10″ tablet with extraordinary build quality for $250? You’re out of your damn mind.

William T Quick

Well, they aren’t selling, not in comparison to either Apple or Android. I expect Microsoft to be out of the Surface business within a couple of years. Their offerings as presently constituted simply aren’t competitive.

Windows desktop apps on a tablet are useless. Metro apps on smartphones and tablets are a shame.

A Windows tablet with a keyboard it’s nothing more than a netbook plus touch screen.

another_user

wow, I gotta ask, have you owned any windows tablets or are you just being biased from a completely ignorant standing?

Joe_HTH

He is right that desktop apps on a tablet suck. However, his comment on Metro apps is just stupid, not to mention being completely full of shit.
He’s simply a troll.

William T Quick

His comments about Metro are closer to being right than he is about Windows desktop apps. I can, and do, run just about any desktop app I want to. But there are a lot of Metro apps I’d like to run, except for the fact they don’t exist. Which is a shame.

WrongPassword

Desktop apps on a 10″ hybrid aren’t bad actually. The icons are often a bit small but they are still usable. On a tablet without a keyboard and mouse/active stylus though, they really do suck.

William T Quick

Well, anybody who tries to run desktop apps in a tablet form factor is missing the point of hybrids in the first place vis. Win 8.x.

William T Quick

Gosh. Then I guess I’m not using Thunderbird, Firefox, Chrome, Scrivener, Roboform, Amazon Cloud Player, Pretty Good Solitaire, Roboform Desktop, GIMP, and several others every damned day on my Asus T100, eh?

Nicolas Klein

I actually think that building Windows RT was a smart move.
Their final product, awfull, the tablets sold with it stupidelly expensive…But building the OS was smart.
Why? It is NOT clear today whether the future of computing will be of cheaper and less energy consuming x86 processors or faster and better ARM processors… If Microsoft didn’t have an, at least, BASIC Windows ARM OS ready, and a new killer ARM processor appeared; it could actually mean the end of Microsoft as we know it.
Now that they DO have an ARM OS; they should focus on merging Windows RT and Windows 8 into a single ..Windows 9?? Something as legacy-compatible as possible (which is hard as most old software is x86 written).
They have a huge path to walk before they can have a chance to survive if ARM ends up being the winning standard, but at least they started walking their first baby-steps.

WrongPassword

Good point on the desire to cover all bases. When even the pokey Raspberry pi with its outdated phone parts can be seen as a potential desktop replacement for casual users, it is only a matter of time before ARM devices and programs mature enough to potentially displace x86. Intel’s reluctance in progressing lower margin Atom chips really stymied x86’s potential in mobile and may still be a continued drag. The artificial limits wintel put on early netbooks have finally come back to haunt them.

meddle0ne

I’ve said this before, but the benefit of RT is that it’s closed off. It does out of the box everything that a lot of PC users do without the worry of viruses and messing things up. That makes it great for my wife and kids. The problem is that they’ve made them so expensive I could only afford to get one for my wife. They need a decent convertible RT tablet that runs $150 on Black Friday and $200 normal retail.

WrongPassword

The problem with that is that Apple’s iPads are already a high quality closed system with far more applications. Google is more open but it has a wide variety of hardware and a decent app store. Windows RT just doesn’t have the apps or even the developers interested in porting the apps much less creating unique apps. If they made the surface their mobile version of xbox with a slew of launch titles, this may be a different story but, as is, it just can’t compete with goog or aapl.

I find a 10-inch monitor too small to be used as a laptop, so applications windows screens are not good at this size

tablet is acceptable because this size is closer to the face.

because of this that tablet with windows is a bad idea!

is the same as using the terrible and abandoned netbook

Peteisback

Thats why you have the metro UI. And thats why the surface 2 is actually quite nice to use. I will get mine for around 380 Euros because of the cheaper price fpr students. The T100 is nice but I absolutely cannot stand the glossy finnish plastic. It brings back haunting memories of my old asus notebook.

Fleeced_Tacoman

I believe the design goal of windows 8 was to use the NT kernel for all OS versions. So RT is more of an offshoot of the effort to put NT on ARM. The major difference being one was optimized for phone screens and the other tablet forms.

http://twitter.com/jdrch jdrch

MS did this for several reasons:
1) To appease Wall Street. ARM is the new hot thing, and not having an ARM strategy would make MS look behind the times
2) Bay Trail didn’t exist at Windows 8’s launch. MS needed something that worked right then and there
3) As an extension of Point #1, most mobile devices ship with ARM and most tablet OEMs have experience with it

William T Quick

That works for the first Surface RT. But not for the second release. I bought Surface RT the day it first became available. But once I realized just how liimited it was, I desperately hoped for a Bay Trail second version. When it became plain that would not happen, I bought my Asus T100 and haven’t looked back. I like this little machine about as well as any computer I’ve ever owned. Of course I don’t go into hysterics over fingerprints on the backside of the tablet….

Matthew Kent

Let me do your journalism for you…. the processor was not available when they were finalizing the design and there was no definite timeline for its release. You could actually read the press releases, it has this information in there… you know that is why they call them “press releases”.

Huh

Yes, the press releases. But of course! And if you want to know anything about PRISM, just ask the NSA.

Harry_Wild

I think were Microsoft missed the boat this year is on the mini tablet – 7″-9″ size and the aspect ratio 4:3 vs. 16:10.
It seems that people who have used 16:10 are moving to the 4:3.
Many new tablets are being purchased in the “mini” size then that of a full size tablet – “10” and larger.
Microsoft is going against the trend again since they have both the larger size and the landscape form factor!

http://www.mrseb.co.uk/ Sebastian Anthony

Yep. It’s just another case of Microsoft being slow, and missing the market trends by a year or two. MS would be in a much healthier position if it had released the Surface 2 a couple of years ago, and then a mini Surface last year. But alas…

Joe_HTH

LOL! Give me a break. Every video and screen form factor on the planet is widescreen. Why should tablets be the only exception? Because Apple said so? F*ck that. Watching videos and gaming is vastly superior on a widescreen tablet.
As for smaller tablets, a Surface Mini is coming.

Robert Littler

Who the hell is moving to 4:3 aspect screens? Only Apple use them, watching a film in letterbox would be like going back to the 90’s.

Soso

The problem with Microsoft was naming the operating system Windows. If they’d name the o/s just “RT” then the tablet would have its own identity without the expectations that comes with a Windows o/s

WrongPassword

The problem with that is that even RT had a desktop mode.

PaperInTheWind

While I share the sentiment of this article, I don’t think it’s either fair or accurate. M$ had no need to produce an Atom tablet. The OEMs can do it themselves. Atom was also not there a year back. More importantly, Windows RT is not necessarily interior to Windows for a pure tablet user. Microsoft did try to sell Wintel tablet, it didn’t work since legacy applications were not designed for touch. They still aren’t and a pure touch user has little use for them anyway. Legacy applications also comes with legacy bad code and malware. Windows can get viruses and slow down after installing some programs, Windows RT wouldn’t. Transformer T100 is a good netbook (if the keyboard works), but only an OK tablet.

Now, M$ did botch it. Neither Windows 8 nor Office was ready for touch only operation and the keyboard covers was advertised as a necessity rather than a accessory. But that’s a different story.

Rodalpho

MS developed windowsRT and released the surfaceRT because they didn’t want to give up another year to the iPad. Simple as that. Realistically, they knew it was a marginal product, but they had a mandate to compete directly with iPad on features, battery life, and price, and that was not possible with x86 last year.

The real question isn’t why MS released the surfaceRT– it’s why they released the surface2. I have no answer to that.

Allen Jayme

I just got my T100 w/64gb and it’s fantastic. I had a Yoga 13 for a bit but it was too awkward and heavy as a tablet. Enter the T100, so far it’s met every test. Office works well, I watched a movie on it last night and the battery life is great (It’s like my iPad 4) It connects with my work email. This device really shows off Windows 8.1. I actually like Windows now. Before there were things my iPad could do that the PC couldn’t but so far, I am very please with performance, storage-I added a 32gb micro SD car plus I tried out the USB 3.0 port with my Passport drive and every works. For $399, this device can’t be faulted. Way to go Asus!!

Zachary Weiner

IMHO I dont think Microsoft Intended to be a Product Manufacturer. Originally the “surface” was a different product all together. And in order to give the OEM partners like Dell/Samsung/Asus the specs that would be required to run Windows 8 – Microsoft had to do some hardware R&D. The surface is Microsoft’s MARKETING leg so that it can push brand recognition for its Tablet OS without Advertising for a specific manufacturer (like they did for Nokia phones before they bought it).

Asok Asus

“IMHO I dont think Microsoft Intended to be a Product Manufacturer.”

Really? Then what was Ballmer’s big announcement about transforming Microsoft into a devices and services company all about? And why did they buy a product manufacturer like Nokia to make products for them?

Jon Donnelly

Windows 8.1 is bad enough, but Windows RT is crippled, its only selling feature is the free Microsoft Office.
It has a tiny ecosystem, doomed from the start. Anyone who buys one will become frustrated that it cannot run most windows apps and its name is downright misleading.

http://www.mrseb.co.uk/ Sebastian Anthony

Yep, it’s just a poorly thought out proposition, from top to bottom.

I love how the Asus T100 comes with Office 2013 Home, too, while still being $100+ cheaper than the Surface 2. Brilliant.

Jon Donnelly

Asus stuff is good value, now just slap a high res screen in their for my remote desktop connection and it could become a workhorse for me. Can’t believe the”office” comes in the Asus. Tidy job.

Brett Turner

Clear proof that the Surface 2 Pro is massively overpriced. I have no interest in the S2P at present prices, the Asus sounds like a very nice machine.

another_user

How is the S2P overpriced for what you get? The 128gb version is only $50 more than the 128gb ipad air. If you are objective and take the fanboy fanaticism out of the equation and just look at the hardware, you get way more bang for your buck from the S2P than the ipad air. Way more powerful processor, 4X the memory and a wacom digitizer, which may not mean much to you, but for artists is an awesome tool.

Joe_HTH

LOL! How in the world are you comparing Haswell to BayTrail?

WrongPassword

I’m just a bit worried about build quality of the first releases. Asus QC for the tf101 left quite a bit to be desired and the initial reviews of the t100 are looking awfully familiar. Still, I’ll snap up the first t100 that comes back in stock at Best Buy in a heartbeat.

Honesty007

Windows RT is a more powerful OS than IOS. Yet RT is described as crippled while ios on a tablet gets a free pass. The last time I check, ios is not powerful enough to allow a browser to render the full content of a lot of web sites. In fact there are many web pages on which safari for example will simply crash. As a result, a large amount of the so called 475,000 apps are nothing more than over glorified, watered down web pages. So for example, ios cannot handle the regular web page for PNC Bank, so there is an App for PNC Bank. What is so magical about that? I love my iPhone, but I gave away my iPad to my wife a long time ago, after I completely stop using it after two weeks, and I will never fall for the hype again. By the way, what desktop program can you run on an iPad? Why is that a requirement for windows tablets, but not for the iPad? Is there a mathlab App for the ipad, or a stata App etc?

Jon Donnelly

Yes but apple do not market it as Mac OS X (lite) do they? Windows 7 Pro, Windows 8 Pro, Home etc. Windows RT can you NOT see how misleading this is. It superficially similar to the Surface Pro. With an ipad you know exactly what your are getting! Windows RT is totally unknown in 1 year it could be completely dead! Would you take that chance? Its going to be replaced by Windows 9. Will your surface run that? early adopt at your peril! Its not even good value.

Honesty007

I do not own a surface, and I am not sure I will be getting one or any other tablet again for that matter. Having owned an iPad and a Playbook, I think I can say that unless something changes with respect to tablets, history will prove them to be some of the biggest techological junks ever invented. Right now I buy an iPad, and I pretty much just have a bigger version of my iPhone. Why buy the same thing twice? What can I do on my iPad that I cannot do on my iPhone?

Jon Donnelly

The point of tablets are to consume media I think, watch youtube, read websites, ebooks and games. Do’ers use ultrabooks and a proper desktop environment, that ASUS Seb mentioned is an acceptable compromise.

Joe_HTH

No it’s not an acceptable compromise. It’s just a compromise, with shit build quality, a far worse screen, worse cameras, and worse performance. How is that acceptable?

I’ll tell you what. You accept that. I won’t.

Honesty007

So if that why Apple is now offering iwork for free on them? This is what can happen when one goes overboard with being a fan of something. You can find yourself in an indefensible position.

SPM

RT has no apps. Why would someone get it over a Windows laptop?

Joe_HTH

Again, no sane person wants to run traditional desktop software on a tablet, because they suck. x86 software is bloated and piss poor on a tablet. Not to mention nobody wants to put up with viruses and malware on a tablet, which full Windows 8 tablets will have to deal with.

Jon Donnelly

The maniacal grin part did give me a chuckle :) Seb is good at disguising a rant with humor!

Jon Donnelly

The maniacal grin part did give me a chuckle :) Seb is good at disguising a rant with humor!

roid

“Microsoft will probably get there eventually”
See, you said it. Microsoft is on a long range plan. You only see the short term. Coupled with the spectacular financial results of the most recent quarter, Microsoft knows what it is doing.
This is only the second year of the company’s foray into ARM tablets. A few more generations will give Surface the traction it needs. To say it should avoid ARM for Atom is ignoring the obvious. Intel makes shitty power saving chips. It is extremely late with Baytrail. No one makes Baytrail tablets yet. Haswell and Baytrail are first generation chips of the power saving variety. To suggest that Microsoft should wait for Intel is waiting for its own demise, which is happening anyways as its relevants suffers. Nonetheless, Surface is gaining traction and Windows RT is the future.
If you read the news, the Windows desktop is going away. Not immediately, but eventually. Windows Apps are the future. The best way to ensure the future is with the Surface tablets since it offers Apps support and no desktop applications. I doubt the Apps ecosystems will thrive from Windows 8 since sticking with desktop applications will stunt the growth of the Windows apps marketplace. Thus, either you move forward or you’re stuck in the past.

Matt Menezes

Why would RT be the future? Bay Trail is superior to many ARM counterparts, and you get x86 support. I would say Windows RT is, at best, a temporary measure or bridge until Intel released viable mobile options.

I forsee products like the T100 which give you a tablet experience with the ability to run existing applications making Windows RT obsolete…

roid

You didn’t read my response. Window RT is the future since the desktop is going away. Baytrail will prolong the desktop, but the desktop is still going way.

How can you declare the Windows RT obsolete since Microsoft will support it? Windows desktop applications are obsolete. That’s not where developers are doing their latest work. They have largely moved on the iOS and Android. Only the Enterprise market have remained loyal to Windows and we are largely talking about Windows 7, not Windows 8.1.

Jon Donnelly

Windows desktop applications are obsolete, what the fook are you smoking? cause I want some.

Joe_HTH

It is dead. Developers aren’t developing on x86 anymore. The only thing you get on x86 is new updates to old programs. There is no meaningful new development being done on x86 or Win32.

Brett Turner

People using Metro on large desktop monitors? The world giving up real windows-based multitasking use two apps side by side on Win RT? Not going to happen.

The desktop is so not dead.

Matt Menezes

I agree desktops are declining, but I’m talking about Bay Trail on tablets – the desktop is firmly Intel’s and mostly Microsoft’s so there’s no point in arguing that.

Assuming the performance per watt is equal for ARM and x86 and costs are equal, would you choose RT over normal Windows? For tablets, why go the RT route and have less software support if you can go normal x86 Windows with the same power consumption, performance, and price? I’d prefer x86 if all other things are equal. That’s the idea behind Bay Trail. Bay Trail is aimed at tablets and seems to be a higher performing, more expensive option at the same power envelope. I do think they need a better GPU, but the CPU is great.

Viruses and malware will continue to be created for all platforms – x86 Windows has been targeted because that’s where all the users are. There is malware for Android and iOS, too, and it’s becoming more prevalent. If RT becomes popular, there will malware/viri created for it, too.

Joe_HTH

How many times does this have to be said. x86 software sucks on a tablet. Nobody with any sense wants to use a tablet for that crap. Full Windows also suffers from malware and viruses that Windows RT does not. Nobody wants to deal with the trappings of Windows on a tablet. Not to mention that nobody is developing any new software for x86. All software development today is being done on different development platforms. Name me one new, meaningful piece of software for x86? I’m talking about something like Chrome or iTunes.
x86 is a dead platform in terms of development.

Jeremy

Joe, you’ve seriously got to be the biggest troll I’ve seen in a
long, long time. A lot of people, myself included, don’t want a larger version of their phone…they want a smaller version of their computer. Enter the T100.

How many times does it have to be said, any platform can potentially suffer from malware. Windows RT may not be a target right now, but if it gets enough users then, eventually,
it will be. The “trappings” as you put it may be a pain, but the
advantages gained are so worth it! So change the record already and quit your b!tching. Install a security suite, problem basically solved.

Running an x86 version of Windows on a highly portable device with good or even just decent performance and a long-lasting battery is exactly what I’ve been waiting for and exactly what I need. With the Asus, I can actually get some work done, but still use it for media too. It’s what tablets should have been all along. Essentially a touch-screen netbook that can detach and be used like a tablet…what’s not to like?

There was a great comment from another user about how he stopped using his iPad after 2 weeks, and how tablets will go down in history as being largely unnecessary devices. I couldn’t agree more. I owned an iPad 3 and a first-gen Nexus 7. Gave the iPad to my wife and returned the Nexus because I just wasn’t using them. As I said before, I don’t need a larger version of my phone.

So I for one, Joe, want to use a tablet for “that crap.” Perhaps your argument might be somewhat more valid for a touch-only experience, but with the included keyboard/touchpad dock on the Asus, I expect it to be a great experience. And the reviews are generally very positive. Now if I can just find one in stock.

Seriously couldn’t imagine buying a Surface. I get Microsoft wanting to keep up with the Joneses and compete in the mobile arena. It kinda feels a little like McDonald’s selling fancy coffee, but whatever. I sort of get why they went with ARM for the first-gen product. But Bay Trail is here, it’s a big step up from Clover Trail, and it’s only going to get better. Who knows, in the long run it might work out. Maybe ARM will ultimately dominate the industry, and maybe Microsoft will eventually get its eco-system up to par with Apple’s and Google’s. But my money is on Intel, and I personally think Microsoft would’ve been better off sticking with them.

Oh, and one last thing Joe: before you pronounce x86 to be dead, let me remind you that you likely won’t be playing Skyrim anytime soon on your ARM-based device. I love my iPhone, don’t get me wrong. But IMO, anything running an ARM chip is
basically a toy. Maybe that will change someday. But for now,
yeah…give me my x86 support.

Asok Asus

“A few more generations will give Surface the traction it needs”

Meanwhile, the competition decides to remain frozen in time during these “few” generations so Microsoft can catch up, correct?

roid

Begging the question? Microsoft will take a few generations for Surface to catch up with apps. This cannot be done without a larger market for the tablets that only offers Window RT, which is mainly Surface and the new Nokia tablets. The operating system is a different issue entirely and I doubt it will be behind more than 1 generation to iOS and Android. It will take a few more generations to deprecate the desktop and bring the Metro UI to parity with the desktop.

MuniMuIa

Well, at least Microsoft finally got rid of the most overrated CEO in the history of big business. Hopefully they can recover from the simpleton.

http://www.jphotog.com Hrunga Zmuda

The answer is easy. Don’t make it out to be so hard. Ballmer is a fool.

http://teddyotero.com/ drokkon

Pithy. Reasoned. Thank you for your valuable contribution.

Joe_HTH

Yeah, that fool tripled revenue and double profits, while being under antitrust shackles. If that’s being a fool, I’ll take it all day long.

http://www.jphotog.com Hrunga Zmuda

And of course that’s why he was recently shown the door? Imagine if he wasn’t so myopic and such and echo chamber denizen!

Gammu

His responsibility is to make money for shareholders. The stock is ~2/3 what it was when he took over, as the stock market hits record highs. That doesn’t make him a fool, it makes him a bad CEO.

Now what makes him a total disaster is coasting along on a hostage user base, throwing half-baked tech at the wall to see what sticks, instead of creating a long-term strategy for profitability based on desirable products.

No, what makes him a fool is believing people actually want to buy Windows 8. So much, in fact, that they are willing to pay hundreds more because it happens to come with a new computer.

SPM

Microsoft stock has gone down a lot since he was CEO while Apple and Google have overtaken Microsoft in value and revenue.

James

Microsoft has only moved to a more mobile consumer-oriented market focus in recent times. Their market has always been businesses. Their revenue split indicates office and server tools represent some of the biggest groups. I don’t think they would break their alliance with intel. Their mobile strategy might be a departure from their traditional intel-bases relationship, but the rest should remain in tact.

melissa

I love my Azus Sonic Master Core i3, but it can’t run steam well – this is really cool to know about the T100 since my kid wants a system that handles game power and at a reasonable price.

D N Buggs

Could it be that Microsoft saw in the tea leaves that there will be a storm of ARM based sub $100 super boards releasing soon with a multitude (16, 32, 64, 1024, 4096) of CPU cores? To date only linux variants have been available for these boards, but with that kind of raw computing power in a package the size of a pack of playing cards the world would be your oyster.

http://teddyotero.com/ drokkon

The title of this article, like so many anti-Microsoft articles on ExtremeTech, is simple click bait. The problem with the article itself is that it is based on the assumption that RT is “hobbled.” True that it won’t run x86 software, but I’m not seeing RT pushed on workstations – it’s sold on tablets only, where most folks WON’T be looking to edit Photoshop PSD files of any size. Because the tech press has so poo-pooed and marginalized the new interface, they automatically assume that any device that ONLY offers “Metro” and Windows 8 apps is “hobbled.”

News for you: for every biased tech reporter, there are thousands who love Windows 8. I’m one of them.

I personally love my RT device, and my brother-in-law just bought one because he loved it too. For on-the-go computing, my Surface RT fits neatly between my graphic-powerhouse workstation on my desk and my smartphone in my pocket. Day-to-day work is done on my workstation, my smartphone is always with me for quick on-the-go access, and the tablet is everything else – from lounging in front of the TV or checking my finances before bed.

Ultimately, my opinion, or yours, means nothing. The market will decide. I’m glad to see Microsoft continue the RT line with the Surface 2 and Nokia jump in with an RT device. I don’t agree with the mouse-and-keyboard users that deride Windows 8, but I can understand it. Those that attack Windows RT on a tablet absolutely baffle me – nobody complained that the iPad doesn’t run OSX! I’m glad to see an RT resurgence now after the tech press absolutely killed the first line of RT tablets for no good reason, although I can see here you’re already trying to kill the second line as well.

I don’t think your question, whether or not Microsoft should have ported Windows to ARM, is a bad one. However, this article, like so many more here on ExtremeTech and elsewhere, is dripping with disdain for all things Microsoft and little more than Monday-morning armchair quarterbacking.

Joe_HTH

Bingo! The arguments in this post are so strong that nobody will argue those arguments.

SPM

The markets certainly have decided – in two words: $1billion writeoff!

Will Fastie

The implication here is that because the Surface doesn’t run Windows, it’s fundamentally flawed. But if that’s the case, why isn’t the iPad fundamentally flawed because it doesn’t run Mac OS/X?
Pundits never complain about an iPad because it isn’t a Macintosh. What’s different about Surface in this respect?

Joe_HTH

Perfect argument Will. These same people, many of whom are also Windows users, never complain about their iPad not having a start button or not being able to run x86 software. I wonder why.

SPM

You are missing something major in the logic there – people who buy a Windows device, buy it for the Windows legacy applications and nothing else. If they do not want Windows legacy apps – and there are an increasing number who do not – they will buy Android or iPad instead. That is why people are looking for a start button on Windows 8 tablets – they want to run Windows legacy apps, not metro apps.

view2share

Simple. Apps — iOS has great apps — many great apps. Surface RT has few apps. As for the tablets, the best screen – truest colors, and lightest weight is on the side of iPad Air.

Surface and Surface 2 are built like a tank, so sturdy. With fewer apps, and lesser quality of screen, the price is too high — Surface sold well at $199 — up to $299 with keyboard is fair. The Surface 2 at $299 or $349 with keyboard would be a good deal. The $449 price of Surface2 is too close to the top of the class iPad Air to sell well, IMHO.

Joe_HTH

You’re a friggin’ idiot. You’re also the only person to describe a tablet as a convertible laptop. The Surface 2 is not a laptop, convertible or otherwise. It’s a tablet. The fact that it has a keyboard is irrelevant. The iPad has keyboards available for it as well.

“In short, the only real thing going for the Surface 2 is its 1920×1080 display”

“Why would you ever buy the Surface 2, or indeed any other ARM-powered Windows RT tablet? If Intel has finally closed the performance and battery life gap between x86 and ARM”

Because most knowledgeable, sane people know that x86 software is absolute shit on a tablet. Who in their right mind wants to run WinRAR on their tablet. No sane person wants to have to deal with viruses and malware on a tablet either, an issue that will plague full Windows tablets.

“it doesn’t actually feel cheap or tacky by any means.”

LOL! The T100 feels like a cheap piece of sh*t compared to the Surface 2.

“but considering the Surface RT and other first-gen Windows RT devices couldn’t even beat the price of the iPad, it’s a moot point.”

This is just a straight up lie because Surface 2 easily beats the iPad Air on price, by $150. Would you like to tell some more lies.

“Plus, what good is a low price point if Windows RT devices can’t actually do anything?”
Just when I thought you couldn’t get any dumber. I’m doing quite a lot on my Surface 2. I’m doing everything an iPad owner can do, plus a whole lot more that they can’t do.
You are an ignorant, disingenuous idiot.

Rumple Stiltskin

Mmmmm, where did you come up with the “$580 price difference”?

lithium451

“The futility of Windows RT”?

Yes Sebastian, I do want less choices!

AnonymousOne

Intel was very late to the game that is why. Only ARM processors offered longer battery life, there was NO Intel processor at that time with 10 hours of battery life, until now. Bay Trail tablets are just coming out. Microsoft could not wait for Intel to get their act together, world is moving at a fast pace in mobile, and Intel was stuck with fast processor that guzzle power. There is no point in making a tablet that just gives 3-5 hours of battery life.

This is similar to American cars with big engines guzzled gas as the gas prices were soaring and polluting environment, still Detroit continued with gas guzzlers, then came Japanese cars that sipped gas. We all now know who won that race.

AnonymousOne

I could see Microsoft using Windows RT in phones one day, that day is not that far, tablets and phones will run same OS. Full blown Windows would be too large to run in a phone chip, it has lot of legacy baggage that it needs to keep, and it has to do heavy duty Enterprise work that is not needed in a phone or tablet. This could be another reason why they made Windows RT.
Could they have made a Windows RT based on X86? probably, may be they had the feeling Intel was not going to make mobile chips at low cost like ARM chips, Intel CEO at that time turned down Apple’s request to make chips for iPhone based on his estimates of low profits.

Dre’ Reavis

The less Win32 code on my tablet device the better. Its like saying Apple should have come out with a tablet that could run OS x from the start instead of designing an os that works ideally through touch. Doesn’t compute.
Also… does the T100 come with a 5.0 megapixel camera?

NavinJay

I wish people wouldn’t bash Windows RT. I have it on my Asus Vivotab RT and I love it. The battery lasts longer than any tablet running the full Windows 8 (that I have seen) and it works great on a tablet. I don’t use my tablet as a desktop replacement. I use it as a tablet. It does everything I need it to.

WrongPassword

My guess as to why they never gave up on ARM is because they still see it as their best entryway into smart phones. Smart phone manufacturers/programmers have not warmed up to Intel and x86 so Microsoft is doing its best to lure 3rd parties away from Google. That said, the only phone maker they have in their pocket is Nokia and they aren’t exactly the biggest name in smart phones. They just don’t have the mobile app base to compete head on with google or apple. Legacy apps may be attractive in large hybrid tablets but would be generally impractical and inefficient for other tablets/smart phones. Still, it is better than the nothing which RT is pretty close to. Here’s hoping MSFT makes a decent atom tablet in the future.

nikkimommyof4

OK I admit I’m slightly ignorant of a lot of the terminology in this article. All I really wanted to know was if Microsoft Surface had office software.

Larry Stevens

It’s probably pretty pointless responding, since this is a “APPLE FANBOY”, but I will. The iPad is no longer the dominant tablet in the market, it’s Android. The point of the ARM Windows 8.1 was for a seamless tablet transition from the Windows 8 Smartphone to a tablet. Yes, they could have stayed Intel, but there is still the potential that the ARM processor could outpace Intel, just as AMD has done in the past.

No one knows what the future holds, but having a foothold in “TWO” distinct architectures opens a lot of “WIndows” for Microsoft (Pun intended).

Besides that, as you obviously made blatantly clear, you are looking at today and yesterday, not a year or two from now.

I have nothing against Apple. I think they make a nice, limited use, product. I also applaud them for bringing smartphones and tablets to the masses in a way that made them sell.

But there is room for multiple players and Microsoft, although extremely late, is just getting into the Market. It will take time and losses to get truly in the game.

jambone

You’re missing a lot and being quite hyperbolic to make up for it:

“Less succinctly, why did Microsoft spend hundreds of millions of dollars, and millions of development hours, building and marketing a platform that has almost no redeeming features?”

It’s doubtful that it was millions of development hours, but even if it were..

Building the Windows 8 core to run on ARM was NOT about building WOA (Windows on ARM) for the Surface: It was simply about building a cross-platform core, one that put the capstone in the arch of the MinWin (http://j.mp/MinWin) ‘project’.

Why is this important? Because phones run on ARM, and WindowsPhone runs on the Win8 core.. Windows RT, contrary to what you’re implying, was a ‘win-win’ in terms of the development effort, because the work already had to be done for the WP platform.

WinRT is simply the API for the Windows8/ModernUI apps which does not require the W32 API. (The biggest goal of MinWin was to decouple the Windows core from the W32 API..).

From a technical perspective, the Surface device is a huge milestone in the evolution of Windows. NOT having support for ‘Classic Windows’ apps is necessarily a feature of an OS that didn’t carry the bloat of the Windows legacy, specifically W32, which relied on the x86 architecture.

That said .. perhaps it would be worth it to suggest the real waste was in NOT spending MORE development time and effort to make W32 work against the ARM instruction set, and therefore bring ‘Classic Windows’ support to ARM devices. However, and actually contradictory to your point about ditching Intel, that would have taken a lot more time, and look, Intel was already knocking at the door of ARM efficiencies club.

Maybe MS took the middle ground to give Intel a little incentive to make x86 work under low-power requirements? Maybe MS threatened to go the route of fully-supporting the W32 API on ARM? Maybe they still should, and articles like this would have a giant foot stuck in their mouths.

But then maybe the entire concept of running Classic Windows apps, built for the precision input of a mouse and keyboard, on a mobile device with low power and and absolute dearth of precision, is misguided and you’re lamenting only at the fact that “boo hoo, you could do it, so why can’t you, since it’s so darn similar!”

Meanwhile, you don’t care your iOS or Android device doesn’t run photoshop or whatever else you want to throw out there that requires x86 Windows .. and why? Because it was never built with that intention? Hmm, neither was Surface, so what’s your point? Oh right, that you’re able to use different measuring sticks for the same class of technology..

http://teddyotero.com/ drokkon

PERFECT.

Roger Christos

Windows RT sucks!

ArneBo

WinRT costed a lot of Money, but at least now Microsoft is in a better position vs Intel. Intel now needs to deliver. And it seems they do.

Use of this site is governed by our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Copyright 1996-2015 Ziff Davis, LLC.PCMag Digital Group All Rights Reserved. ExtremeTech is a registered trademark of Ziff Davis, LLC. Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission of Ziff Davis, LLC. is prohibited.